More on John Coleman's Special tonight – KUSI press release says NASA improperly manipulated data

UPDATE: See

John Coleman’s hourlong news special “Global Warming – The Other Side” now online, all five parts here

via SpaceRef.com

PRESS RELEASE

Date Released: Thursday, January 14, 2010

Source: KUSI-TV

Climate researchers have discovered that NASA researchers improperly manipulated data in order to claim 2005 as “THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD.” KUSI-TV meteorologist, Weather Channel founder, and iconic weatherman John Coleman will present these findings in a one-hour special airing on KUSI-TV on Jan.14 at 9 p.m. A related report will be made available on the Internet at 6 p.m. EST on January 14th at www.kusi.com.

In a new report, computer expert E. Michael Smith and Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo discovered extensive manipulation of the temperature data by the U.S. Government’s two primary climate centers: the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) in Ashville, North Carolina and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) at Columbia University in New York City. Smith and D’Aleo accuse these centers of manipulating temperature data to give the appearance of warmer temperatures than actually occurred by trimming the number and location of weather observation stations. The report is available online at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf.

The report reveals that there were no actual temperatures left in the computer database when NASA/NCDC proclaimed 2005 as “THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD.” The NCDC deleted actual temperatures at thousands of locations throughout the world as it changed to a system of global grid points, each of which is determined by averaging the temperatures of two or more adjacent weather observation stations. So the NCDC grid map contains only averaged, not real temperatures, giving rise to significant doubt that the result is a valid representation of Earth temperatures.

The number of actual weather observation points used as a starting point for world average temperatures was reduced from about 6,000 in the 1970s to about 1,000 now. “That leaves much of the world unaccounted for,” says D’Aleo.

The NCDC data are regularly used by the National Weather Service to declare a given month or year as setting a record for warmth. Such pronouncements are typically made in support of the global warming alarmism agenda. Researchers who support the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also regularly use the NASA/NCDC data, including researchers associated with the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia that is now at the center of the “Climategate” controversy.

This problem is only the tip of the iceberg with NCDC data. “For one thing, it is clear that comparing data from previous years, when the final figure was produced by averaging a large number of temperatures, with those of later years, produced from a small temperature base and the grid method, is like comparing apples and oranges,” says Smith. “When the differences between the warmest year in history and the tenth warmest year is less than three quarters of a degree, it becomes silly to rely on such comparisons,” added D’Aleo who asserts that the data manipulation is “scientific travesty” that was committed by activist scientists to advance the global warming agenda.

Smith and D’Aleo are both interviewed as part of a report on this study on the television special, “Global Warming: The Other Side” seen at 9 PM on January 14th on KUSI-TV, channel 9/51, San Diego, California. That program can now be viewed via computer at the website http://www.kusi.com/. The detailed report is available at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Rob

So does that push 2009, which has just been announced as 2nd warmest year globally behind 2005, up into 1st place?

Honest ABE

I came across this quote and couldn’t help but think of a few people….
“It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.”
– Thomas Paine

Kevin Kilty

And, doing corrections out of order, and having not much of an idea that the corrections are particularly accurate in the first place…but other than this the data is great!

iconoclast

Oh, Lysenko? Your followers have done you proud…..

Wow. That’s amazing.

K2

“The report reveals that there were no actual temperatures left in the computer database when NASA/NCDC proclaimed 2005 as “THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD.” The NCDC deleted actual temperatures at thousands of locations throughout the world as it changed to a system of global grid points….”
Among other things, maybe they should also be charged with destruction of government property, or failure to comply with legal archiving legislation, if that can be made to apply. The cost of setting up all those monitoring stations and then destroying the data that can never be replicated is just unthinkable as a scientist.

David Ball

Not many load bearing walls left in the AGW house of cards. Structurally unsafe for habitation.

Steve in SC

There are some real stinkers in the employ of the government.
Real trustworthy.

lowercasefred

My personal feeling is that no one is ever going to take the rap for this fraud. The trail will lead to too many politicians and ALL politicians have to cover for each other as they all have “skin in the game”. They all live in the same glass house.
We should count ourselves lucky that the fraud has been exposed.

Henry chance

This explains why the castigate McIntyre and others that wanted data. They had fear of being caught. Criminals just don’t volunteer incriminating evidence. The behavior is just like several people I know that were in embezzlement.

P Walker

Hats off to Chiefio and D’Aleo . I hope enough people see this – I intend to watch this via internet tomorrow , if I can . Thanks , guys .

Looks like Al Gore’s buddy was up to his ears in fudge as was CRU.
I hope they you-tube the video.

fishhead

With only 1000 weather observation points and about 150 million square kilometers of land mass, that’s about one observation point per 150,000 square kilometers. By comparison, New York state is approximately 140,000 sq.km.

David Alan Evans

Just WOW. Go chiefio & D’Aleo! You both ROCK as they say.
DaveE.

royfomr

6000 readings bad, 1000 readings good! According to GRC ( Gavin at RealClangGate -last year) the lower the readings the better- circa 70 global readings was optimal to measuring Moma Earths fever.
Gawd bless you, young Mister GS. You is truly a seeker of Truth!
More is good but lesser is better. Trillions well spent, you’re a jewel young man!

u.k.(us)

the collapse of a house of cards, is sudden.
one can hope.

Peter of Sydney

Time for some of the jokers to go to jail. I can see the day coming when they are in jail and complaining of freezing temperatures and demanding better heating. So much for runaway global warming. What a joke.

Dr A Burns

The temperature maximums by decade graph http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf with a peak in the 1930’s, looks very similar to Briffa 1998 hide-the-decline N hemisphere tree ring graph.

At what point do the alarmists drown in the rising seas of auditing, checks and balances and accountability!

Gary Hladik

“The detailed report is available at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf.”
Nice summary. Well done.
It could use a bit more proofreading, however. For example, this sentence on page 3:
“By using airport stations, the data centers claim they have rural data includes, but instruments have been documented in airports near tarmacs, runways and airplane exhaust.”
Should be “included”.

tokyoboy

What does KUSI stand for?
[Reply: the call letters for a TV station. ~dbs]

Kevin

I am deeply alarmed that all the raw data is lost. It is more then theft. It is pure vandalism or the desire to deprive a scientific treasure to others. It is like burning rare papyrus scripts.
Would this data still exist at the weather station site itself? Can any of this data be recovered from other sources?
What other “heritage data” has such flimsy security that anyone can simply and arbitrarily make it evaporate with a click of a mouse and deprive scientists now or in the future access to it?
What an outrage!

Gillian Lord

It is a worry that soon someone will decide that we do not even need 1000 temperature readings. Could it be done with, say, 50?

I’m never sure where I stand.
Sometimes I am on the “well, maybe CO2 contributed a very very tiny percentage to the most recent warming period of 1975-1998”, and the other half of the time I think “the temperature record is so worthless that I’m not even sure if we’re warmer than the earlier part of the century.”

Mike McMillan

I’ve completed USHCN vs USHCN version 2 blink comparison charts for Wisconsin. As with the Illinois charts, the majority of stations had their raw data adjusted to show more warming by lowering the temperatures in the first half of the 20th century.
That brings the raw data more in line with the GISS homogenized versions. I haven’t blinked the original GISS with the new homogenized charts yet, but I’d bet a nickle they’ll show even more warming.
Wisconsin original USHCN raw / revised raw data –
http://www.rockyhigh66.org/stuff/USHCN_revisions_wisconsin.htm
Illinois original raw / revised raw –
http://www.rockyhigh66.org/stuff/USHCN_revisions.htm
Revised raw data. Oxymoron?

PaulT

While the points made in the report are those that many have previously noted, the grammatical and typographical errors in the document do not help its credibility.
e.g. “Though the population of the world has increased from 1.5 to 6.7 million and dozens of …”.
Just as Gore is castigated for flubbing his comments on the temperature of Earth’s core, these flubs in a report such as this might be used to ridicule some very interesting observations in the report.

royfomr

Dr. Bob (17:25:02) :
I’m never sure where I stand.
Sometimes I am on the “well, maybe CO2 contributed a very very tiny percentage to the most recent warming period of 1975-1998″, and the other half of the time I think “the temperature record is so worthless that I’m not even sure if we’re warmer than the earlier part of the century.”
Ditto.

Bulldust

If, as alledged, the core data have been tweaked, manipulated or whatever… to my mind the biggest travesty is that all the research based upon false data is null and void. Every single study involving this data would then be suspect… surely?

Tom P

Dr. Bob (17:25:02) :
This might help:
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps+002
With a value of 0.79 C we’ve just overtaken the monthly peak of the 1998 Super El Niño. We appear to be seeing a massive release of stored thermal energy in the Pacific.
After 1998 temperatures did not settle back to their values before the El Niño. If the same happens again it will be very difficult to explain how just natural processes could have added so much energy.

Bryan Madeley

Anthony,
It would be very useful with items such as this one if we could obtain the relevant time in GMT (UTC) as well as local time at the event.
Kindest regards

Gary Hladik

Gillian Lord (17:24:41) : “It is a worry that soon someone will decide that we do not even need 1000 temperature readings. Could it be done with, say, 50?”
Heck, you could get equally useful numbers from a single crystal ball…or a coin.

The discussion of the effects of reducing station numbers on temp trends is worth a more nuanced discussion. Though Anthony should be able to speak of the effects on U.S. temps of the changing number of stations used (vis-a-vis using all stations or “best” stations).
The argument that raw station data was destroyed, however, seems patently false given that its all archived here: http://dss.ucar.edu/datasets/ds570.0/

Anticlimactic

I do wonder, if historical raw data has been deleted, whether copies will be found to exist once the AGW edifice has crumbled. I can not believe all the researchers are truly loyal to AGW even if forced to be to get a job and may have taken clandestine copies. Not quite ‘Fahrenheit 451′, but it does come to mind.
Is any independent organisation trying to create a store of untainted data?

crosspatch

There is one modification that might get things across to the general public a little more clearly:
“added D’Aleo who asserts that the data manipulation is ‘scientific travesty’ that was committed by activist scientists to advance the global warming agenda.”
Should be something like:
“added D’Aleo who asserts that the data manipulation is ‘scientific travesty’ that was committed by activist scientists to advance the global warming agenda which brings them millions of dollars in additional research grants.”

crosspatch

Oh, and Danny Glover today blames the Haiti earthquake on global warming.
I was wondering how long that would take.

Anticlimactic

Certainly it would save money, time and effort if all the stations were shut down and the figures simply made up. Do they still need the fig leaf of being vaguely based on actual data?
Actually yes – then the only real data would be from satellites, and that data is ‘wrong’.

Craigo

Gary Hladik (17:51:41) :Heck, you could get equally useful numbers from a single crystal ball…or a coin.
Henceforth, ALL global temperatures will be determined by the CRUde Hansen-Mann AlGorithm based on the most accurate temperature proxy known – Mauna Loa CO2 readings. And that is “settled”.
/sarc

Pascvaks

u.k.(us) (16:54:56) :
“the collapse of a house of cards, is sudden.
one can hope.”
___________________________
Unfortunately the house of cards we’re speaking of is a huge single entity. For want of a better name, let’s call it “The Western World” or “The Second Roman Empire”. When character, integrity, and honor play no function in a civilization, the civilization has no future. Time to buy a pair of mules (or a team of oxan) and a wagon? Or maybe a miracle? Yes, let’s pray for a miracle. Hark! Are those the barbarians at the door?

mpaul

I imagine the RC will have a detailed technical refutation of this by tomorrow. Something like:
This report is from a non-peer reviewed source with known connections to the fossil fuel industry. Further, the lead author is known to be a sniveling little rat faced git. This is the kind of analysis we’ve come to expect from the blinkard, phillistine pig-ignorance types who produce this noncreative garbage. They sit there on their loathsome, spotty behinds, sqeezing blackheads, and not caring a tinkers cuss for the peer review process, what excrement! What whining hypocritical toadies they are, with their Tony Jacklin golf culbs and their bleeding denialist handshakes. You don’t frighten us, you oily non-climate scientist! Go and boil your bottom, sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, so-called skeptics, you and all your silly Exxon/Mobile funded shills. I fart in your general direction.
Or something like that.

Galen Haugh

PaulT above is absolutely right. Correct this: “Though the population of the world has increased from 1.5 to 6.7 million people and dozens of peer review papers have established”… immediately! (billions, not millions)

mkurbo

“NASA manipulated data”
Maybe, but they have a history of peer pressure and manipulation from example below right through the solid rocket (Thiokol) booster tragedy and on into this current Hansen mess.
Thomas Gold:
At the time, scientists were engaged in a heated debate over the physical properties of the moon’s surface. In 1955, he predicted that the Moon was covered by a layer of fine rock powder stemming from “the ceaseless bombardment of its surface by Solar System debris”. This led to the dust being jokingly referred to as “Gold’s dust”.
In any case, NASA sent an unmanned Surveyor to analyze the conditions on the surface of the Moon. Gold was ridiculed by fellow scientists, not only for his hypothesis, but for the approach he took in communicating NASA’s concerns to the American public; in particular, some experts were infuriated with his usage of the term “moon dust” in reference to lunar surface. When the Apollo 11 crew landed on the Moon in 1969 and brought back the first samples of lunar rocks, researchers found that lunar soil was in fact powdery. Gold said the findings were consistent with his hypothesis, noting that “in one area as they walked along, they sank in between five and eight inches”. However, Gold received little credit for his correct prediction, and was even criticized for his original prediction of a deep layer of lunar dust.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Gold was a vocal critic of NASA’s Space Shuttle program, deriding claims that the agency could fly 50 missions a year or that it could have low budget costs. NASA officials warned Gold that if he testified his concerns before Congress, his research proposals would lose their support from NASA. Gold ignored the warning and testified before a Congressional committee headed by Senator Walter Mondale. In a letter to NASA administrator James C. Fletcher, George Low wrote that “Gold should realize that being funded by the Government and NASA is a privilege, and that it would make little sense for us to fund him as long as his views are what they are now”
The last sentence (emphasis added) says it all…

sharkhearted

Joe D’Aleo is relentless. Give ’em hell, Joe!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

Oliver Ramsay

royfomr (17:37:21) :
Dr. Bob (17:25:02) :
I’m never sure where I stand.
Sometimes I am on the “well, maybe CO2 contributed a very very tiny percentage to the most recent warming period of 1975-1998″, and the other half of the time I think “the temperature record is so worthless that I’m not even sure if we’re warmer than the earlier part of the century.”
Ditto.
==========
Same here.

I wish these expletives would come shovel the record high temps and global warming off my walk and driveway.

u.k.(us)

Pascvaks (18:21:09) :
u.k.(us) (16:54:56) :
“the collapse of a house of cards, is sudden.
one can hope.”
___________________________
Unfortunately the house of cards we’re speaking of is a huge single entity. For want of a better name, let’s call it “The Western World” or “The Second Roman Empire”. When character, integrity, and honor play no function in a civilization, the civilization has no future. Time to buy a pair of mules (or a team of oxan) and a wagon? Or maybe a miracle? Yes, let’s pray for a miracle. Hark! Are those the barbarians at the door?
============
yes it is, they want to come in out of the cold. shall we let them ? they keep talking about some travesty??
i agree with your premise.

Brian Madeley, re UTC time for the 9 p.m. PST Jan 14th showing: it is 05:00 hours, on January 15th.
see this link for the conversion to :
http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/zones.html

pat

how many hours since this story broke? about 11 hours.
do a google ‘news’ search and u get precisely ONE link and that is to delingpole’s BLOG in the UK Tele:
Dodgy GISS temperature records exposed: the US Climategate?
Telegraph.co.uk (blog) – James Delingpole – ‎3 hours ago‎
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100022334/dodgy-giss-temperature-records-exposed-the-us-climategate/
the AGW cabal has nothing on the “MAINSTREAM MEDIA” cabal.
who would have thought NASA AGW ‘workings’ could be legally brought to light, hot on the heels of climategate, and the media would simply ignore it?

James F. Evans

If NASA can be convincingly shown to have manipulated data…
It opens a new chapter in Climategate.

Roger Knights

From the PDF linked to at the end of the article (atop this page) comes a Latin tag I was unfamiliar with:

The data bases on which so many important decisions are to be made are “Non Gradus Anus Rodentum!”

Bill Parsons

Mike McMillan (17:28:30) :
I’ve completed USHCN vs USHCN version 2 blink comparison charts for Wisconsin. As with the Illinois charts, the majority of stations had their raw data adjusted to show more warming by lowering the temperatures in the first half of the 20th century.

Well-done (again) Mike! Maybe some others will get busy and try this – a little above my tech savy.